How Jesus became god'... from not being one. Bart Ehrman.

[LittleNipper]

As for the reasons for you being agnostic, that sounds like you aren't sure of creation science nor evolution. Most people have read about it to generally have formed an opinion. Usually, it is based on their faith of whether they believe in God/gods or not.

No, you have it backwards. It is evidence that makes me an atheist. Based on the available evidence, I have absolutely no doubt that the Earth is 4.5+ billion years old and that all life evolved from a common ancestor. I don't see any evidence of an intelligence behind what has taken place in those years, the evidence I do see points to natural processes. That is why I consider myself an atheist.

What I don't know is what existed BEFORE the Big Bang. Since there is no evidence for either an eternal or a created universe I can't rule out a creator so that makes me an agnostic. The only faith I have is faith in myself and my ability to reason and examine evidence.

I believe the earth is only as old as GOD created it and you imagine it has to be...

There is evidence that Earth is 4.5 billion years old. If God created the Earth 6,000 years ago, why did he make it appear it is so much older? Why did he make stars that we can see so far away that their light should take millions of years to reach us. Why not have them just blink into view as their 6,000 year old light reaches us. Why do we need galaxies that we can see only with modern telescopes?

Because according to the molecular structure of the minerals and rocks and gases GOD created to sustain life, as HE wished it to be, those rocks, minerals, gases, etc., had to be as they were designed when they were needed. There are of course angelic beings who can enjoy the universe wherever it exists. It is an arrogant scientist who insists that what we see should appear different if the universe was younger. Such are not taking into account the obvious necessity of a healthy environment for man and animals in which to exist comfortably. When an artist paints a picture of a tree, does he start with an acorn, or does he simply design a finished tree as he sees fit? Would anyone suggest that the said artist was being misleading? Would Adam and Eve have navels? Adam was created from the dust: however, he was indeed a designed prototype for the human race. Adam had no "mother", yet it doesn't seem unreasonable that he would have had a navel. And if the universe began as a material revelation of GOD to HIS created beings, would HE not design and create something that surpasses human reasoning ---awesome in fact.

Very unconvincing arguments. Can you explain why the "molecular structure of the minerals and rocks and gases GOD created to sustain life" had to look old or are you just exercising your circular logic and basically saying God did and it "surpasses human reasoning"? If if surpasses human reasoning how is it you can explain it?

That aside, can you explain why there are so many galaxies that were only visible to mankind since the invention of the telescope? What purpose do they serve?

The evolutionist believes the various molecular structures formed to become as they are over time. There is no way he or she can comprehend or accept that anything was designed in such a way to accommodate life. What purpose does a red sunset serve or a golden dawn? Why aren't flowers all the same color? The telescope is much like a pair of glasses which allows a colorblind individual to see that GOD's creation is far more complex than he could ever imagine. The reason I can somewhat explain it is because the scales have been lifted from my eyes and I can see my Savior. He healed the sick, made the blind to see, the lame to walk, the deaf to hear. He changed mere water to the best wine, He calmed storms, He told people about themselves, and He brought the dead back from the grave. PLUS there was an earthquake the day He gave up His spirit that rent the vale of the Holy of Holies in twain from top to bottom. Later, He arose again that I might be saved. However, to be saved, one must first see that he needs saving, and then that he wishes to be saved.

 

[fncceo]

There is no way he or she can comprehend or accept that anything was designed in such a way to accommodate life.

Or, did life evolve to accommodate the environment?

The fact that extremophiles exist in the least accommodating places on our planet should convince you of that possibility.

 

[harmonica]

Startlingly, a lecture at the Atheist org.. Freedom From Religion Foundation/FFRF.. by one of thee most Renowned professor's of Religious Studies, Bart Ehrman.
One of the world's foremost experts on Christianity/NT.
Can't say he doesn't know his topic.
99% of the time he is invited to speak to religious groups.
But, as it turns out, he's an "Agnostic and an Atheist."
A good bit of the youtube on his 'new' book, 'How Jesus became God' [2014]
I've seen him several times on PBS'/other religious documentaries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bart_D._Ehrman

Bart D. Ehrman (1955) is an American New Testament scholar, currently the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.​

​

According to the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, he is one of North America's Leading scholars in his field, having written and edited 27 books, including three college textbooks.​

He has also achieved acclaim at the popular level, authoring five New York Times bestsellers.​

Ehrman's work focuses on textual criticism of the New Testament, the historical Jesus, and the development of early Christianity.​

[.....]​

`

jesus was not god--plain and simple

 

[harmonica]

As for the reasons for you being agnostic, that sounds like you aren't sure of creation science nor evolution. Most people have read about it to generally have formed an opinion. Usually, it is based on their faith of whether they believe in God/gods or not.

No, you have it backwards. It is evidence that makes me an atheist. Based on the available evidence, I have absolutely no doubt that the Earth is 4.5+ billion years old and that all life evolved from a common ancestor. I don't see any evidence of an intelligence behind what has taken place in those years, the evidence I do see points to natural processes. That is why I consider myself an atheist.

What I don't know is what existed BEFORE the Big Bang. Since there is no evidence for either an eternal or a created universe I can't rule out a creator so that makes me an agnostic. The only faith I have is faith in myself and my ability to reason and examine evidence.

I believe the earth is only as old as GOD created it and you imagine it has to be...

There is evidence that Earth is 4.5 billion years old. If God created the Earth 6,000 years ago, why did he make it appear it is so much older? Why did he make stars that we can see so far away that their light should take millions of years to reach us. Why not have them just blink into view as their 6,000 year old light reaches us. Why do we need galaxies that we can see only with modern telescopes?

Because according to the molecular structure of the minerals and rocks and gases GOD created to sustain life, as HE wished it to be, those rocks, minerals, gases, etc., had to be as they were designed when they were needed. There are of course angelic beings who can enjoy the universe wherever it exists. It is an arrogant scientist who insists that what we see should appear different if the universe was younger. Such are not taking into account the obvious necessity of a healthy environment for man and animals in which to exist comfortably. When an artist paints a picture of a tree, does he start with an acorn, or does he simply design a finished tree as he sees fit? Would anyone suggest that the said artist was being misleading? Would Adam and Eve have navels? Adam was created from the dust: however, he was indeed a designed prototype for the human race. Adam had no "mother", yet it doesn't seem unreasonable that he would have had a navel. And if the universe began as a material revelation of GOD to HIS created beings, would HE not design and create something that surpasses human reasoning ---awesome in fact.

Very unconvincing arguments. Can you explain why the "molecular structure of the minerals and rocks and gases GOD created to sustain life" had to look old or are you just exercising your circular logic and basically saying God did and it "surpasses human reasoning"? If if surpasses human reasoning how is it you can explain it?

That aside, can you explain why there are so many galaxies that were only visible to mankind since the invention of the telescope? What purpose do they serve?

The evolutionist believes the various molecular structures formed to become as they are over time. There is no way he or she can comprehend or accept that anything was designed in such a way to accommodate life. What purpose does a red sunset serve or a golden dawn? Why aren't flowers all the same color? The telescope is much like a pair of glasses which allows a colorblind individual to see that GOD's creation is far more complex than he could ever imagine. The reason I can somewhat explain it is because the scales have been lifted from my eyes and I can see my Savior. He healed the sick, made the blind to see, the lame to walk, the deaf to hear. He changed mere water to the best wine, He calmed storms, He told people about themselves, and He brought the dead back from the grave. PLUS there was an earthquake the day He gave up His spirit that rent the vale of the Holy of Holies in twain from top to bottom. Later, He arose again that I might be saved. However, to be saved, one must first see that he needs saving, and then that he wishes to be saved.

no one needs to be saved......FIRST, you have to prove we need to be saved

 

[harmonica]

He was looking for reasons not to believe which is why he studied textual criticisms (whatever that is) in graduate school and then made a career out of it.

Completely wrong, did you just make that up? He was a devout Christian who wanted to read and understand the word of God. Only much later did he question his faith and it had nothing to do with textual criticisms (the study of the history and context of the Bible).

No. I didn’t make it up. I deduced it from his actions.

Really? Which of his actions?

That he was drawn to study textual criticisms. It’s not a surprise he made a career out of it.

No, it's no surprise he made a career out of it. It's also no surprise you'd jump to the conclusion that no one would read and try to understand the history and context of the Bible unless they didn't believe in it.

It's not a surprise that an atheist would read the Bible and not understand it. It's also not a surprise that an atheist would think that God could be found from reading the Bible. Nor is it a surprise that an atheist would conclude that God doesn't exist from reading the Bible. God isn't a book. God is a relationship to be entered into. You aren't going to get that from a book.

still believing the fairytales of the bible?

 

[ESay]

righteous gap between God and man is FAR too great for any sacrifice from a human to be adequate to settle the score, or pay for the sins, of a single person. GOD'S SON could do that, not only for one person, but for the whole world in HIS time and in the future

The instructions and descriptions of sacrifices were given by God in the OT. That means they were more than enough for humans.

Moreover, the OT says that human sacrifices are 'abomination' for God.

, on that point, GOD is actually helping out mankind here as CLEARLY the intervention of HIS SON in the affairs of mankind is a GIFT from heaven. Mankind fell at the hands of a very Powerful, Eternal Malignant Being, the fallen angel Lucifer, aka the Devil... so GOD sent HIS SON to earth, which levels the playing field

What was more important - Jesus' sacrifice or his teaching?

 

[alang1216]

As for the reasons for you being agnostic, that sounds like you aren't sure of creation science nor evolution. Most people have read about it to generally have formed an opinion. Usually, it is based on their faith of whether they believe in God/gods or not.

No, you have it backwards. It is evidence that makes me an atheist. Based on the available evidence, I have absolutely no doubt that the Earth is 4.5+ billion years old and that all life evolved from a common ancestor. I don't see any evidence of an intelligence behind what has taken place in those years, the evidence I do see points to natural processes. That is why I consider myself an atheist.

What I don't know is what existed BEFORE the Big Bang. Since there is no evidence for either an eternal or a created universe I can't rule out a creator so that makes me an agnostic. The only faith I have is faith in myself and my ability to reason and examine evidence.

I believe the earth is only as old as GOD created it and you imagine it has to be...

There is evidence that Earth is 4.5 billion years old. If God created the Earth 6,000 years ago, why did he make it appear it is so much older? Why did he make stars that we can see so far away that their light should take millions of years to reach us. Why not have them just blink into view as their 6,000 year old light reaches us. Why do we need galaxies that we can see only with modern telescopes?

Because according to the molecular structure of the minerals and rocks and gases GOD created to sustain life, as HE wished it to be, those rocks, minerals, gases, etc., had to be as they were designed when they were needed. There are of course angelic beings who can enjoy the universe wherever it exists. It is an arrogant scientist who insists that what we see should appear different if the universe was younger. Such are not taking into account the obvious necessity of a healthy environment for man and animals in which to exist comfortably. When an artist paints a picture of a tree, does he start with an acorn, or does he simply design a finished tree as he sees fit? Would anyone suggest that the said artist was being misleading? Would Adam and Eve have navels? Adam was created from the dust: however, he was indeed a designed prototype for the human race. Adam had no "mother", yet it doesn't seem unreasonable that he would have had a navel. And if the universe began as a material revelation of GOD to HIS created beings, would HE not design and create something that surpasses human reasoning ---awesome in fact.

Very unconvincing arguments. Can you explain why the "molecular structure of the minerals and rocks and gases GOD created to sustain life" had to look old or are you just exercising your circular logic and basically saying God did and it "surpasses human reasoning"? If if surpasses human reasoning how is it you can explain it?

That aside, can you explain why there are so many galaxies that were only visible to mankind since the invention of the telescope? What purpose do they serve?

The evolutionist believes the various molecular structures formed to become as they are over time. There is no way he or she can comprehend or accept that anything was designed in such a way to accommodate life. What purpose does a red sunset serve or a golden dawn? Why aren't flowers all the same color? The telescope is much like a pair of glasses which allows a colorblind individual to see that GOD's creation is far more complex than he could ever imagine. The reason I can somewhat explain it is because the scales have been lifted from my eyes and I can see my Savior. He healed the sick, made the blind to see, the lame to walk, the deaf to hear. He changed mere water to the best wine, He calmed storms, He told people about themselves, and He brought the dead back from the grave. PLUS there was an earthquake the day He gave up His spirit that rent the vale of the Holy of Holies in twain from top to bottom. Later, He arose again that I might be saved. However, to be saved, one must first see that he needs saving, and then that he wishes to be saved.

I have trouble believing in a Designer since there is little evidence of design. There is nothing in nature that can not be explained by evolution while some things, e.g., vestigial structures, contradict ID.

So where is He now? Who is healing the sick or lame using their supernatural powers?

 

[james bond]

There is evidence that Earth is 4.5 billion years old. If God created the Earth 6,000 years ago, why did he make it appear it is so much older? Why did he make stars that we can see so far away that their light should take millions of years to reach us. Why not have them just blink into view as their 6,000 year old light reaches us. Why do we need galaxies that we can see only with modern telescopes?

C'mon, you keep blaming God for the contradictions when it's Satan.

The evidence of Earth as 4.5 B years old is not conclusive, but based on biased assumptions by the scientists of atheism. When one needs long time, it took a long time for them to get it for Darwin. Evolution needed around 4.5 billion of years for it to happen according to Darwin; he would not accept 3 billion years old Earth. Thus, Darwin was already dead when the atheist scientists came up with 4.5 billion years old Earth. Anyway, the Earth can be young based on time dilation of light from the distant light. In other words, your light years away is distance and not time.

You know less about Darwin, he thought the Earth was only a few hundred million years old, than you do about time dilation, a term you heard and threw in others were as ignorant of what it means as you are.

We have directly measured many natural processes (speed of light and distance to stars & galaxies, radioisotope decay, rates of sedimentation, speed of continental drift, rates of evolution, etc.) and they ALL point to a very old earth. Seems to me, either God is playing tricks on us or he has allowed Satan to play tricks on us. Personally, I'd say the buck stops on God's desk.

Fax.

I get it from my evolution website:
Clair Patterson

"Radioactivity also gave the history of life an absolute calendar. By measuring the atoms produced by these breakdowns inside rocks, physicists were able to estimate their ages (right). And by comparing the ratios of those atoms to atoms from meteorites, they could estimate how long ago it was that the Earth formed along with the rest of the solar system. In 1956 the American geologist Clair Patterson (left) announced that the Earth was 4.5 billion years old. Darwin had finally gotten the luxury of time he had craved."

Radiometric Dating: Clair Patterson

evolution.berkeley.edu

Not only do you not know about Darwin, you know about God even less. God would not play tricks, but we find Satan does and it's all up to him because of free will. For example, everything you just wrote is based on it and you just lied. The buck stops on your desk when the age of the Earth could doom you to a world of false science.

 

[ding]

He was looking for reasons not to believe which is why he studied textual criticisms (whatever that is) in graduate school and then made a career out of it.

Completely wrong, did you just make that up? He was a devout Christian who wanted to read and understand the word of God. Only much later did he question his faith and it had nothing to do with textual criticisms (the study of the history and context of the Bible).

No. I didn’t make it up. I deduced it from his actions.

Really? Which of his actions?

That he was drawn to study textual criticisms. It’s not a surprise he made a career out of it.

No, it's no surprise he made a career out of it. It's also no surprise you'd jump to the conclusion that no one would read and try to understand the history and context of the Bible unless they didn't believe in it.

It's not a surprise that an atheist would read the Bible and not understand it. It's also not a surprise that an atheist would think that God could be found from reading the Bible. Nor is it a surprise that an atheist would conclude that God doesn't exist from reading the Bible. God isn't a book. God is a relationship to be entered into. You aren't going to get that from a book.

still believing the fairytales of the bible?

Still believing I give a shit about convincing you

 

[ding]

As for the reasons for you being agnostic, that sounds like you aren't sure of creation science nor evolution. Most people have read about it to generally have formed an opinion. Usually, it is based on their faith of whether they believe in God/gods or not.

No, you have it backwards. It is evidence that makes me an atheist. Based on the available evidence, I have absolutely no doubt that the Earth is 4.5+ billion years old and that all life evolved from a common ancestor. I don't see any evidence of an intelligence behind what has taken place in those years, the evidence I do see points to natural processes. That is why I consider myself an atheist.

What I don't know is what existed BEFORE the Big Bang. Since there is no evidence for either an eternal or a created universe I can't rule out a creator so that makes me an agnostic. The only faith I have is faith in myself and my ability to reason and examine evidence.

I believe the earth is only as old as GOD created it and you imagine it has to be...

There is evidence that Earth is 4.5 billion years old. If God created the Earth 6,000 years ago, why did he make it appear it is so much older? Why did he make stars that we can see so far away that their light should take millions of years to reach us. Why not have them just blink into view as their 6,000 year old light reaches us. Why do we need galaxies that we can see only with modern telescopes?

Because according to the molecular structure of the minerals and rocks and gases GOD created to sustain life, as HE wished it to be, those rocks, minerals, gases, etc., had to be as they were designed when they were needed. There are of course angelic beings who can enjoy the universe wherever it exists. It is an arrogant scientist who insists that what we see should appear different if the universe was younger. Such are not taking into account the obvious necessity of a healthy environment for man and animals in which to exist comfortably. When an artist paints a picture of a tree, does he start with an acorn, or does he simply design a finished tree as he sees fit? Would anyone suggest that the said artist was being misleading? Would Adam and Eve have navels? Adam was created from the dust: however, he was indeed a designed prototype for the human race. Adam had no "mother", yet it doesn't seem unreasonable that he would have had a navel. And if the universe began as a material revelation of GOD to HIS created beings, would HE not design and create something that surpasses human reasoning ---awesome in fact.

Very unconvincing arguments. Can you explain why the "molecular structure of the minerals and rocks and gases GOD created to sustain life" had to look old or are you just exercising your circular logic and basically saying God did and it "surpasses human reasoning"? If if surpasses human reasoning how is it you can explain it?

That aside, can you explain why there are so many galaxies that were only visible to mankind since the invention of the telescope? What purpose do they serve?

The evolutionist believes the various molecular structures formed to become as they are over time. There is no way he or she can comprehend or accept that anything was designed in such a way to accommodate life. What purpose does a red sunset serve or a golden dawn? Why aren't flowers all the same color? The telescope is much like a pair of glasses which allows a colorblind individual to see that GOD's creation is far more complex than he could ever imagine. The reason I can somewhat explain it is because the scales have been lifted from my eyes and I can see my Savior. He healed the sick, made the blind to see, the lame to walk, the deaf to hear. He changed mere water to the best wine, He calmed storms, He told people about themselves, and He brought the dead back from the grave. PLUS there was an earthquake the day He gave up His spirit that rent the vale of the Holy of Holies in twain from top to bottom. Later, He arose again that I might be saved. However, to be saved, one must first see that he needs saving, and then that he wishes to be saved.

I have trouble believing in a Designer since there is little evidence of design. There is nothing in nature that can not be explained by evolution while some things, e.g., vestigial structures, contradict ID.

So where is He now? Who is healing the sick or lame using their supernatural powers?

I love how you think God is your servant and owes you something.

 

[james bond]

So where is He now? Who is healing the sick or lame using their supernatural powers?

God the Father is not in our universe as he hates sin; He's likely in the fourth dimension. Do you now see how Adam's sin screwed it up so much? The only supernatural powers that we can use are our life spirits to heal the sick or lame. It is Satan who has dominion over Earth and the universe. The evidence is you. You blame God and are not even aware of Satan as "god of the world." The majority are headed for catastrophe including Bart Ehrman. He's one of false messiahs.

 

[alang1216]

There is evidence that Earth is 4.5 billion years old. If God created the Earth 6,000 years ago, why did he make it appear it is so much older? Why did he make stars that we can see so far away that their light should take millions of years to reach us. Why not have them just blink into view as their 6,000 year old light reaches us. Why do we need galaxies that we can see only with modern telescopes?

C'mon, you keep blaming God for the contradictions when it's Satan.

The evidence of Earth as 4.5 B years old is not conclusive, but based on biased assumptions by the scientists of atheism. When one needs long time, it took a long time for them to get it for Darwin. Evolution needed around 4.5 billion of years for it to happen according to Darwin; he would not accept 3 billion years old Earth. Thus, Darwin was already dead when the atheist scientists came up with 4.5 billion years old Earth. Anyway, the Earth can be young based on time dilation of light from the distant light. In other words, your light years away is distance and not time.

You know less about Darwin, he thought the Earth was only a few hundred million years old, than you do about time dilation, a term you heard and threw in others were as ignorant of what it means as you are.

We have directly measured many natural processes (speed of light and distance to stars & galaxies, radioisotope decay, rates of sedimentation, speed of continental drift, rates of evolution, etc.) and they ALL point to a very old earth. Seems to me, either God is playing tricks on us or he has allowed Satan to play tricks on us. Personally, I'd say the buck stops on God's desk.

Fax.

I get it from my evolution website:
Clair Patterson

"Radioactivity also gave the history of life an absolute calendar. By measuring the atoms produced by these breakdowns inside rocks, physicists were able to estimate their ages (right). And by comparing the ratios of those atoms to atoms from meteorites, they could estimate how long ago it was that the Earth formed along with the rest of the solar system. In 1956 the American geologist Clair Patterson (left) announced that the Earth was 4.5 billion years old. Darwin had finally gotten the luxury of time he had craved."

Radiometric Dating: Clair Patterson

evolution.berkeley.edu

Not only do you not know about Darwin, you know about God even less. God would not play tricks, but we find Satan does and it's all up to him because of free will. For example, everything you just wrote is based on it and you just lied. The buck stops on your desk when the age of the Earth could doom you to a world of false science.

I doubt you got "Evolution needed around 4.5 billion of years for it to happen according to Darwin; he would not accept 3 billion years old Earth" from any website since I'm pretty sure you made that up.

You say "God would not play tricks" and blame such tricks on Satan yet you don't explain why the universe looks so old including why galaxies are so far away that it takes millions or billions of years for their light to reach us, radioisotope decay, rates of sedimentation, speed of continental drift, rates of evolution, etc.

 

[alang1216]

As for the reasons for you being agnostic, that sounds like you aren't sure of creation science nor evolution. Most people have read about it to generally have formed an opinion. Usually, it is based on their faith of whether they believe in God/gods or not.

No, you have it backwards. It is evidence that makes me an atheist. Based on the available evidence, I have absolutely no doubt that the Earth is 4.5+ billion years old and that all life evolved from a common ancestor. I don't see any evidence of an intelligence behind what has taken place in those years, the evidence I do see points to natural processes. That is why I consider myself an atheist.

What I don't know is what existed BEFORE the Big Bang. Since there is no evidence for either an eternal or a created universe I can't rule out a creator so that makes me an agnostic. The only faith I have is faith in myself and my ability to reason and examine evidence.

I believe the earth is only as old as GOD created it and you imagine it has to be...

There is evidence that Earth is 4.5 billion years old. If God created the Earth 6,000 years ago, why did he make it appear it is so much older? Why did he make stars that we can see so far away that their light should take millions of years to reach us. Why not have them just blink into view as their 6,000 year old light reaches us. Why do we need galaxies that we can see only with modern telescopes?

Because according to the molecular structure of the minerals and rocks and gases GOD created to sustain life, as HE wished it to be, those rocks, minerals, gases, etc., had to be as they were designed when they were needed. There are of course angelic beings who can enjoy the universe wherever it exists. It is an arrogant scientist who insists that what we see should appear different if the universe was younger. Such are not taking into account the obvious necessity of a healthy environment for man and animals in which to exist comfortably. When an artist paints a picture of a tree, does he start with an acorn, or does he simply design a finished tree as he sees fit? Would anyone suggest that the said artist was being misleading? Would Adam and Eve have navels? Adam was created from the dust: however, he was indeed a designed prototype for the human race. Adam had no "mother", yet it doesn't seem unreasonable that he would have had a navel. And if the universe began as a material revelation of GOD to HIS created beings, would HE not design and create something that surpasses human reasoning ---awesome in fact.

Very unconvincing arguments. Can you explain why the "molecular structure of the minerals and rocks and gases GOD created to sustain life" had to look old or are you just exercising your circular logic and basically saying God did and it "surpasses human reasoning"? If if surpasses human reasoning how is it you can explain it?

That aside, can you explain why there are so many galaxies that were only visible to mankind since the invention of the telescope? What purpose do they serve?

The evolutionist believes the various molecular structures formed to become as they are over time. There is no way he or she can comprehend or accept that anything was designed in such a way to accommodate life. What purpose does a red sunset serve or a golden dawn? Why aren't flowers all the same color? The telescope is much like a pair of glasses which allows a colorblind individual to see that GOD's creation is far more complex than he could ever imagine. The reason I can somewhat explain it is because the scales have been lifted from my eyes and I can see my Savior. He healed the sick, made the blind to see, the lame to walk, the deaf to hear. He changed mere water to the best wine, He calmed storms, He told people about themselves, and He brought the dead back from the grave. PLUS there was an earthquake the day He gave up His spirit that rent the vale of the Holy of Holies in twain from top to bottom. Later, He arose again that I might be saved. However, to be saved, one must first see that he needs saving, and then that he wishes to be saved.

I have trouble believing in a Designer since there is little evidence of design. There is nothing in nature that can not be explained by evolution while some things, e.g., vestigial structures, contradict ID.

So where is He now? Who is healing the sick or lame using their supernatural powers?

I love how you think God is your servant and owes you something.

If God is my judge he indeed owes me something. Any judge should be expected to be fair, to obey the laws and ensure they were available to the judged, to pass judgement based on the individual and their unique situation.

 

[alang1216]

So where is He now? Who is healing the sick or lame using their supernatural powers?

God the Father is not in our universe as he hates sin; He's likely in the fourth dimension. Do you now see how Adam's sin screwed it up so much? The only supernatural powers that we can use are our life spirits to heal the sick or lame. It is Satan who has dominion over Earth and the universe. The evidence is you. You blame God and are not even aware of Satan as "god of the world." The majority are headed for catastrophe including Bart Ehrman. He's one of false messiahs.

At least heaven won't be claustrophobic for you. I won't be there but I guess no Muslims, Hindus, or Buddhists will be there, also no Jews born in the last 2,000 years. I'm betting must Christians won't make it either, no Catholics born after the reformation, no Mormons or Eastern Orthodox.

 

[james bond]

There is evidence that Earth is 4.5 billion years old. If God created the Earth 6,000 years ago, why did he make it appear it is so much older? Why did he make stars that we can see so far away that their light should take millions of years to reach us. Why not have them just blink into view as their 6,000 year old light reaches us. Why do we need galaxies that we can see only with modern telescopes?

C'mon, you keep blaming God for the contradictions when it's Satan.

The evidence of Earth as 4.5 B years old is not conclusive, but based on biased assumptions by the scientists of atheism. When one needs long time, it took a long time for them to get it for Darwin. Evolution needed around 4.5 billion of years for it to happen according to Darwin; he would not accept 3 billion years old Earth. Thus, Darwin was already dead when the atheist scientists came up with 4.5 billion years old Earth. Anyway, the Earth can be young based on time dilation of light from the distant light. In other words, your light years away is distance and not time.

You know less about Darwin, he thought the Earth was only a few hundred million years old, than you do about time dilation, a term you heard and threw in others were as ignorant of what it means as you are.

We have directly measured many natural processes (speed of light and distance to stars & galaxies, radioisotope decay, rates of sedimentation, speed of continental drift, rates of evolution, etc.) and they ALL point to a very old earth. Seems to me, either God is playing tricks on us or he has allowed Satan to play tricks on us. Personally, I'd say the buck stops on God's desk.

Fax.

I get it from my evolution website:
Clair Patterson

"Radioactivity also gave the history of life an absolute calendar. By measuring the atoms produced by these breakdowns inside rocks, physicists were able to estimate their ages (right). And by comparing the ratios of those atoms to atoms from meteorites, they could estimate how long ago it was that the Earth formed along with the rest of the solar system. In 1956 the American geologist Clair Patterson (left) announced that the Earth was 4.5 billion years old. Darwin had finally gotten the luxury of time he had craved."

Radiometric Dating: Clair Patterson

evolution.berkeley.edu

Not only do you not know about Darwin, you know about God even less. God would not play tricks, but we find Satan does and it's all up to him because of free will. For example, everything you just wrote is based on it and you just lied. The buck stops on your desk when the age of the Earth could doom you to a world of false science.

I doubt you got "Evolution needed around 4.5 billion of years for it to happen according to Darwin; he would not accept 3 billion years old Earth" from any website since I'm pretty sure you made that up.

You say "God would not play tricks" and blame such tricks on Satan yet you don't explain why the universe looks so old including why galaxies are so far away that it takes millions or billions of years for their light to reach us, radioisotope decay, rates of sedimentation, speed of continental drift, rates of evolution, etc.

>>I doubt you got "Evolution needed around 4.5 billion of years for it to happen according to Darwin; he would not accept 3 billion years old Earth" from any website since I'm pretty sure you made that up.<<

Haha. Your statement shows you do not understand evolutionary science at all. First, I didn't say Darwin needed 4.5 billion years. What I did say was what Clair Patterson showed with his calculations using radiometric dating. Instead, Darwin said he wanted over 3 billion years. Prior to Patterson's calculation, Earth's age was estimated as 3 billion years old. Look it up. You need to learn things for yourself even if they are lies of evolution.

So Darwin said he wanted over 3 billion years old Earth which is how I got my statement. Thus, what does evolution come up with? That life first appeared on Earth 3.5 billion years ago.

Finally, why would I make stuff like that up when anyone can look it up to verify? Everyone knows Darwin needed long time, common descent, and tree of life.

 

[james bond]

At least heaven won't be claustrophobic for you. I won't be there but I guess no Muslims, Hindus, or Buddhists will be there, also no Jews born in the last 2,000 years. I'm betting must Christians won't make it either, no Catholics born after the reformation, no Mormons or Eastern Orthodox.

Now, you bring up a great question and that is how to get to heaven? The Bible tells us that one only has to believe in Jesus as the one who saves us. One has to have faith in Jesus and believe. Aside from that, I would think we have to repent for our sins as this comes from believing in Jesus. All of this is explained in the Bible. If we look at the other religions and what they say, then it's a matter of finding a true religion. I think many people look at these religions and find something they can live with and bring meaning to their life and this includes atheism. They have their own ideas of their reward for believing in their religion. Atheism doesn't have anything. They think life in itself is their reward.

 

[alang1216]

There is evidence that Earth is 4.5 billion years old. If God created the Earth 6,000 years ago, why did he make it appear it is so much older? Why did he make stars that we can see so far away that their light should take millions of years to reach us. Why not have them just blink into view as their 6,000 year old light reaches us. Why do we need galaxies that we can see only with modern telescopes?

C'mon, you keep blaming God for the contradictions when it's Satan.

The evidence of Earth as 4.5 B years old is not conclusive, but based on biased assumptions by the scientists of atheism. When one needs long time, it took a long time for them to get it for Darwin. Evolution needed around 4.5 billion of years for it to happen according to Darwin; he would not accept 3 billion years old Earth. Thus, Darwin was already dead when the atheist scientists came up with 4.5 billion years old Earth. Anyway, the Earth can be young based on time dilation of light from the distant light. In other words, your light years away is distance and not time.

You know less about Darwin, he thought the Earth was only a few hundred million years old, than you do about time dilation, a term you heard and threw in others were as ignorant of what it means as you are.

We have directly measured many natural processes (speed of light and distance to stars & galaxies, radioisotope decay, rates of sedimentation, speed of continental drift, rates of evolution, etc.) and they ALL point to a very old earth. Seems to me, either God is playing tricks on us or he has allowed Satan to play tricks on us. Personally, I'd say the buck stops on God's desk.

Fax.

I get it from my evolution website:
Clair Patterson

"Radioactivity also gave the history of life an absolute calendar. By measuring the atoms produced by these breakdowns inside rocks, physicists were able to estimate their ages (right). And by comparing the ratios of those atoms to atoms from meteorites, they could estimate how long ago it was that the Earth formed along with the rest of the solar system. In 1956 the American geologist Clair Patterson (left) announced that the Earth was 4.5 billion years old. Darwin had finally gotten the luxury of time he had craved."

Radiometric Dating: Clair Patterson

evolution.berkeley.edu

Not only do you not know about Darwin, you know about God even less. God would not play tricks, but we find Satan does and it's all up to him because of free will. For example, everything you just wrote is based on it and you just lied. The buck stops on your desk when the age of the Earth could doom you to a world of false science.

I doubt you got "Evolution needed around 4.5 billion of years for it to happen according to Darwin; he would not accept 3 billion years old Earth" from any website since I'm pretty sure you made that up.

You say "God would not play tricks" and blame such tricks on Satan yet you don't explain why the universe looks so old including why galaxies are so far away that it takes millions or billions of years for their light to reach us, radioisotope decay, rates of sedimentation, speed of continental drift, rates of evolution, etc.

>>I doubt you got "Evolution needed around 4.5 billion of years for it to happen according to Darwin; he would not accept 3 billion years old Earth" from any website since I'm pretty sure you made that up.<<

Haha. Your statement shows you do not understand evolutionary science at all. First, I didn't say Darwin needed 4.5 billion years. What I did say was what Clair Patterson showed with his calculations using radiometric dating. Instead, Darwin said he wanted over 3 billion years. Prior to Patterson's calculation, Earth's age was estimated as 3 billion years old. Look it up. You need to learn things for yourself even if they are lies of evolution.

So Darwin said he wanted over 3 billion years old Earth which is how I got my statement. Thus, what does evolution come up with? That life first appeared on Earth 3.5 billion years ago.

Finally, why would I make stuff like that up when anyone can look it up to verify? Everyone knows Darwin needed long time, common descent, and tree of life.

Doubling down on your lie ("Darwin said he wanted over 3 billion years old Earth which is how I got my statement")? Why would you make stuff like that up when anyone can look it up to verify? Or do you have a link that supports it?

In 1658, based on his reading of the Bible and on historical records, the Irish clergyman James Ussher declared that God had created the Earth on October 22, 4004 B.C. Geologists of Darwin's day begged to differ, arguing for a far older Earth. Darwin, knowing that evolution required vastly more time than just six millennia, concurred. In the first edition of the Origin of Species, he estimated our planet to be at least several hundred million years old.

 

[LittleNipper]

Startlingly, a lecture at the Atheist org.. Freedom From Religion Foundation/FFRF.. by one of thee most Renowned professor's of Religious Studies, Bart Ehrman.
One of the world's foremost experts on Christianity/NT.
Can't say he doesn't know his topic.
99% of the time he is invited to speak to religious groups.
But, as it turns out, he's an "Agnostic and an Atheist."
A good bit of the youtube on his 'new' book, 'How Jesus became God' [2014]
I've seen him several times on PBS'/other religious documentaries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bart_D._Ehrman

Bart D. Ehrman (1955) is an American New Testament scholar, currently the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.​

​

According to the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, he is one of North America's Leading scholars in his field, having written and edited 27 books, including three college textbooks.​

He has also achieved acclaim at the popular level, authoring five New York Times bestsellers.​

Ehrman's work focuses on textual criticism of the New Testament, the historical Jesus, and the development of early Christianity.​

[.....]​

`

jesus was not god--plain and simple

If HE only rose from the dead, that would be proof enough. However, there is simply too many things attributed to Jesus for Him to be a mere mortal.

 

[LittleNipper]

As for the reasons for you being agnostic, that sounds like you aren't sure of creation science nor evolution. Most people have read about it to generally have formed an opinion. Usually, it is based on their faith of whether they believe in God/gods or not.

No, you have it backwards. It is evidence that makes me an atheist. Based on the available evidence, I have absolutely no doubt that the Earth is 4.5+ billion years old and that all life evolved from a common ancestor. I don't see any evidence of an intelligence behind what has taken place in those years, the evidence I do see points to natural processes. That is why I consider myself an atheist.

What I don't know is what existed BEFORE the Big Bang. Since there is no evidence for either an eternal or a created universe I can't rule out a creator so that makes me an agnostic. The only faith I have is faith in myself and my ability to reason and examine evidence.

I believe the earth is only as old as GOD created it and you imagine it has to be...

There is evidence that Earth is 4.5 billion years old. If God created the Earth 6,000 years ago, why did he make it appear it is so much older? Why did he make stars that we can see so far away that their light should take millions of years to reach us. Why not have them just blink into view as their 6,000 year old light reaches us. Why do we need galaxies that we can see only with modern telescopes?

Because according to the molecular structure of the minerals and rocks and gases GOD created to sustain life, as HE wished it to be, those rocks, minerals, gases, etc., had to be as they were designed when they were needed. There are of course angelic beings who can enjoy the universe wherever it exists. It is an arrogant scientist who insists that what we see should appear different if the universe was younger. Such are not taking into account the obvious necessity of a healthy environment for man and animals in which to exist comfortably. When an artist paints a picture of a tree, does he start with an acorn, or does he simply design a finished tree as he sees fit? Would anyone suggest that the said artist was being misleading? Would Adam and Eve have navels? Adam was created from the dust: however, he was indeed a designed prototype for the human race. Adam had no "mother", yet it doesn't seem unreasonable that he would have had a navel. And if the universe began as a material revelation of GOD to HIS created beings, would HE not design and create something that surpasses human reasoning ---awesome in fact.

Very unconvincing arguments. Can you explain why the "molecular structure of the minerals and rocks and gases GOD created to sustain life" had to look old or are you just exercising your circular logic and basically saying God did and it "surpasses human reasoning"? If if surpasses human reasoning how is it you can explain it?

That aside, can you explain why there are so many galaxies that were only visible to mankind since the invention of the telescope? What purpose do they serve?

The evolutionist believes the various molecular structures formed to become as they are over time. There is no way he or she can comprehend or accept that anything was designed in such a way to accommodate life. What purpose does a red sunset serve or a golden dawn? Why aren't flowers all the same color? The telescope is much like a pair of glasses which allows a colorblind individual to see that GOD's creation is far more complex than he could ever imagine. The reason I can somewhat explain it is because the scales have been lifted from my eyes and I can see my Savior. He healed the sick, made the blind to see, the lame to walk, the deaf to hear. He changed mere water to the best wine, He calmed storms, He told people about themselves, and He brought the dead back from the grave. PLUS there was an earthquake the day He gave up His spirit that rent the vale of the Holy of Holies in twain from top to bottom. Later, He arose again that I might be saved. However, to be saved, one must first see that he needs saving, and then that he wishes to be saved.

I have trouble believing in a Designer since there is little evidence of design. There is nothing in nature that can not be explained by evolution while some things, e.g., vestigial structures, contradict ID.

So where is He now? Who is healing the sick or lame using their supernatural powers?

I love how you think God is your servant and owes you something.

If God is my judge he indeed owes me something. Any judge should be expected to be fair, to obey the laws and ensure they were available to the judged, to pass judgement based on the individual and their unique situation.

Please consider LUKE 16:19-31

Luke 16:19-31

King James Version

19 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:
20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,
21 And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.
22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;
23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.
24 And he cried and said, "Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame."
25 But Abraham said, "Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.
26 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence."
27 Then he said, "I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:
28 For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment."
29 Abraham saith unto him, "They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them."
30 And he said, "Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent."
31 And he said unto him, "If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."

 

[james bond]

There is evidence that Earth is 4.5 billion years old. If God created the Earth 6,000 years ago, why did he make it appear it is so much older? Why did he make stars that we can see so far away that their light should take millions of years to reach us. Why not have them just blink into view as their 6,000 year old light reaches us. Why do we need galaxies that we can see only with modern telescopes?

C'mon, you keep blaming God for the contradictions when it's Satan.

The evidence of Earth as 4.5 B years old is not conclusive, but based on biased assumptions by the scientists of atheism. When one needs long time, it took a long time for them to get it for Darwin. Evolution needed around 4.5 billion of years for it to happen according to Darwin; he would not accept 3 billion years old Earth. Thus, Darwin was already dead when the atheist scientists came up with 4.5 billion years old Earth. Anyway, the Earth can be young based on time dilation of light from the distant light. In other words, your light years away is distance and not time.

You know less about Darwin, he thought the Earth was only a few hundred million years old, than you do about time dilation, a term you heard and threw in others were as ignorant of what it means as you are.

We have directly measured many natural processes (speed of light and distance to stars & galaxies, radioisotope decay, rates of sedimentation, speed of continental drift, rates of evolution, etc.) and they ALL point to a very old earth. Seems to me, either God is playing tricks on us or he has allowed Satan to play tricks on us. Personally, I'd say the buck stops on God's desk.

Fax.

I get it from my evolution website:
Clair Patterson

"Radioactivity also gave the history of life an absolute calendar. By measuring the atoms produced by these breakdowns inside rocks, physicists were able to estimate their ages (right). And by comparing the ratios of those atoms to atoms from meteorites, they could estimate how long ago it was that the Earth formed along with the rest of the solar system. In 1956 the American geologist Clair Patterson (left) announced that the Earth was 4.5 billion years old. Darwin had finally gotten the luxury of time he had craved."

Radiometric Dating: Clair Patterson

evolution.berkeley.edu

Not only do you not know about Darwin, you know about God even less. God would not play tricks, but we find Satan does and it's all up to him because of free will. For example, everything you just wrote is based on it and you just lied. The buck stops on your desk when the age of the Earth could doom you to a world of false science.

I doubt you got "Evolution needed around 4.5 billion of years for it to happen according to Darwin; he would not accept 3 billion years old Earth" from any website since I'm pretty sure you made that up.

You say "God would not play tricks" and blame such tricks on Satan yet you don't explain why the universe looks so old including why galaxies are so far away that it takes millions or billions of years for their light to reach us, radioisotope decay, rates of sedimentation, speed of continental drift, rates of evolution, etc.

>>I doubt you got "Evolution needed around 4.5 billion of years for it to happen according to Darwin; he would not accept 3 billion years old Earth" from any website since I'm pretty sure you made that up.<<

Haha. Your statement shows you do not understand evolutionary science at all. First, I didn't say Darwin needed 4.5 billion years. What I did say was what Clair Patterson showed with his calculations using radiometric dating. Instead, Darwin said he wanted over 3 billion years. Prior to Patterson's calculation, Earth's age was estimated as 3 billion years old. Look it up. You need to learn things for yourself even if they are lies of evolution.

So Darwin said he wanted over 3 billion years old Earth which is how I got my statement. Thus, what does evolution come up with? That life first appeared on Earth 3.5 billion years ago.

Finally, why would I make stuff like that up when anyone can look it up to verify? Everyone knows Darwin needed long time, common descent, and tree of life.

Doubling down on your lie ("Darwin said he wanted over 3 billion years old Earth which is how I got my statement")? Why would you make stuff like that up when anyone can look it up to verify? Or do you have a link that supports it?

In 1658, based on his reading of the Bible and on historical records, the Irish clergyman James Ussher declared that God had created the Earth on October 22, 4004 B.C. Geologists of Darwin's day begged to differ, arguing for a far older Earth. Darwin, knowing that evolution required vastly more time than just six millennia, concurred. In the first edition of the Origin of Species, he estimated our planet to be at least several hundred million years old.

Finally, you present something as a claim. According to ToE, several hundred million years old would be wrong. You mean according to Darwinism, his long time was several hundred million years old? That doesn't seem very accurate. The least he could've gave was a range. Darwin is making an extraordinary claim, so he needs to provide extraordinary evidence. In fact, William Thomson, a great physicist during Darwin's time challenged him with a younger age of Earth of a hunded million years. Isn't that what you claimed earlier?